Ann: Investor Webinar Presentation, page-24

I was interested by Tim Forbes comment (36.50 min into the presentation) that because they are using a fluid bed process, which is widely used at scale in industry, that they have high confidence that Hazer's specific application of the fluid bed process can be scaled up as well. This explains why the partners - Fortis, Engie etc. have been prepared to proceed as far as they have before the CDP had been completed. It also causes me to reassess the significance of this first reactor. I viewed it as a bit of a stop gap measure, a design they had already decided not to be practical, but fitted simply because the inductive based heating reactor was not ready yet. But in fact, the first reactor proves up the fundamental fluid bed process for Hazer, and so provides strong confidence for scale up. The inductive reactor is still significant because it obviates the need for specialist high temperature metals, and will be the preferred design for scale up. As such precise data from that reactor will be important, but should not deviate that far from the initial reactor, if anything you would expect an improvement in energy efficiency due to the more efficient way of heating the process.

In regards to previous comments about a take over of Hazer. I consider it very unlikely that a successful takeover could be achieved. I think it suits the Gas industry only to well to have an independent company provide this technology on a licensing basis to all market players. Without this technology many Gas assets will become stranded assets, and the industry knows that. No gas company wants to be going cap in hand to one of their competitors to license this technology. As such I think any attempt at a take over would produce a bidding war between Oil and Gas majors and so they won't be able to get Hazer as a bargain, and so won't try.